With all the discussion about what we as pc gamers would like to see in the game vs. console settings, I think this will be a clear indication to UBI what the majority of pc gamers that frequent these forums would expect to see in R6:Vegas.<form action="http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums" method="POST" name="VOTE">

Even though I chose to do the Council idea, it would be far more efficent to start over.

why? because its geared towards consoles, it would be like painting a tank pink or painting a clown car with camo and adding a 50Cal to the roof... it may look diffrent but it still drives like a tank or handles like a clown car

bin_jackson

11-02-2006, 02:12 PM

Only add lean & peak IMO. I've played the game, and i must say it's good... (AND NO! I'm not a console kiddie!)

Clever_Hans

11-02-2006, 02:43 PM

I don't know, R6: Vegas seems to be looking pretty good. If anything, I'd say a delay to add leaning and prone as an option instead of TPV, but otherwise..

Obviously a more realism-geared game appealing to the PC crowd would be nice, but we're just not going to get that.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Rainbow Six: Vegas Official Site
http://www.dantes-casino.com/r6/link.html?i=90a38B

deosl

11-02-2006, 02:44 PM

Heh, can't you accept the fact that Vegas will not the R6 game most of us PC gamers want? It's a port designed for console consumers, NOT PC consumers.

It's a fact & I hope Vegas sells poorly too see that the PC gamers don't want another port in the future. They sure treat us like pooh, why should we give our earned cash away to them?

Play the demo and make up your own decisions. If it sucks I'll certanly spread the word to all the R6 PC MP players that this is another Lockdown. Lockdown had PB support, look where it is now, don't get your hopes up, never if Ubisoft is involved.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

sadly i must say cancel it is already too FUBAR to carry the Rainbow Six Logo<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Nothing is foolproof to the well trained fool.

SFLUFAN

11-02-2006, 03:23 PM

Cancel it completely.

KungFu_CIA

11-02-2006, 03:29 PM

As far as the "Council's Ideas" are concerned, there is no way they are going to be put in this game because this game was most likely started in 2004, and UBI knew exactly the direction they were going to go and no amount of "Council" suggestions were going to change that.

Two-year development cycles is something gamers on all platforms are going to have get used to, like it or not.

This is also what is killing real innovation and why mainstream publishers don't take creative risks any more like Redstorm Entertainment was able to do with the original R6, and GR games.

Couple this with the fact most triple-A games budgets are now equal a mid-range Hollywood movie... Anywhere from $30-$40+ million USD... Along with a shortage of third-party (non mainstream) publishers and investors who are willing to finance "risky" games...

This all equals gamers are going to see more of the same year after year as far as sequels to already established franchises -- no matter how badly executed -- Is concerned, unfortunately.

Two-year development cycles is also why mainstream publishers buy up smaller development houses like RSE; to not only keep competition from harnessing the talent, but to keep the talent busy for two years in the process with NDAs, Non-Compete and Exclusivity contracts.

Also, as far as technological advancement and development goes -- Which is separate from game production -- Everything is cyclical.

This means at this very moment console development is very big because for the past two to three years the PC has been more or less stagnant and on the verge of the next leap in hardware advancements with true dual/quad cores, dedicated physics processors as well as software like DX 10 and Windows Vista -- 95% of what future PC will use; the remaining 5% using Linux, or being Mac-based systems with proprietary OSes.

Analysts predict you will see a shift (back) to PC development in the next few years because all the hardware and software vendors are going to want a proverbial piece of the pie in helping forward and perfect these new technologies which makes way for the next generation of console hardware and software. This is the cycle console development has always followed and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

This concerns both console gamers and PC gamers if they are true gamers at heart and that means if they can accept the PC and the console for what they are along with their strengths and weaknesses and just enjoy playing games in general no matter what the platform.

This may surprise you, but I checked out some sales figures and the bulk of UBI's sales are still PC games followed second by console.

Bottom line: If I were a developer and or publisher of video games I would try and balance my portfolio between the console and the PC markets in order to have a good sales of both, but I wold also acknowledge there is a distinct difference between the two markets and who plays the games within those two markets (and why) and try and give gamers the benefit of the doubt (don't assume they are idiots) across all platforms for the simple fact a lot of the statistics are changing and there is a lot of cross-over going on between the two markets and this can be an asset to the company if you know how to manage this instead of fearing or denying it, IMO.

JanderMoonstar

11-02-2006, 04:08 PM

This may surprise you, but I checked out some sales figures and the bulk of UBI's sales are still
PC games followed second by console.

You will have to point us to that but as far as I know, it's untrue but the figures are definitely non-negligeable.

I cannot fact-check everything you said above but overall, I do agree. My personal opinion is that PC gaming in general will improve with Windows Vista. The tools are much more accessible now, there are pretty good both commercial and free engines on the market now, and so forth.

Windows Vista will definitely change PC gaming if Microsoft delivers. There is the Games Explorer that will facilitate/streamline access to your gaming library, parental controls, signed stable drivers, quality branding and guidelines. Then, there is XNA that will improve gaming development, including indie development.

In short, I see all the ingredients for stronger than ever PC gaming for the years to come.

Bottom line: If I were a developer and or publisher of video games I would try and balance my portfolio between the console and the PC markets in order to have a good sales of both, but I wold also acknowledge there is a distinct difference between the two markets and who plays the games within those two markets (and why) and try and give gamers the benefit of the doubt (don't assume they are idiots) across all platforms for the simple fact a lot of the statistics are changing and there is a lot of cross-over going on between the two markets and this can be an asset to the company if you know how to manage this instead of fearing or denying it, IMO.

True. To be fair though, I think publishers are intelligent enough to see that. However, if they have money to invest and they believe they can get safer/bigger returns by investing on consoles, it stands for reason that there is much less left to spend on PC and ports.

It's to be noted that many of the greatest (and best selling) PC games are not necessarily
mega-productions.

J.

Suhoi-35

11-06-2006, 11:55 AM

I would like to see the improved version of Raven Shield which was (add still is) a legendary game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif. It would be the best to cancel the project and start from the beginning.
Ubi should listen to the hardcore R6 fans because the marketing success is highly dependent of the buyers.

Sonkev

11-07-2006, 03:46 PM

Originally posted by Suhoi-35:
I would like to see the improved version of Raven Shield which was (add still is) a legendary game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif. It would be the best to cancel the project and start from the beginning.
Ubi should listen to the hardcore R6 fans because the marketing success is highly dependent of the buyers.

Ubisoft is to stupid to do this<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i103.photobucket.com/albums/m151/SonKev/THEREALPERFECT.jpg

Rainbow Six 3: Raven Shield "It's simply the best tactical shooter currently available on the PC". -Gamespy.com
"Sadly, Lockdown may go down in history as the installment that kills the Rainbow Six franchise." -Gamespy.com

ezu1

11-07-2006, 06:37 PM

Do me the faviour and cancel that piece of arcadish/scripted/linear/hollywood **** and for once in a couple of years deliver something original that actually will deserve the name Rainbow Six.

JanderMoonstar

11-07-2006, 06:48 PM

Originally posted by ezu1:
Do me the faviour and cancel that piece of arcadish/scripted/linear/hollywood **** and for once in a couple of years deliver something original that actually will deserve the name Rainbow Six.

Rainbow Six 3: Raven Shield "It's simply the best tactical shooter currently available on the PC". -Gamespy.com
"Sadly, Lockdown may go down in history as the installment that kills the Rainbow Six franchise." -Gamespy.com

KungFu_CIA

11-09-2006, 08:16 PM

Originally posted by JanderMoonstar:

Hollywood sells, though. Look at future Tom Clancy movies...

It isn't even so much this because a lot of developers... Actual persons who code games... Want to get into Hollywood and work on movies like "Finding Nemo" and "King Kong" that are laiden with, or completely CGI effects because this is the upper-echelon of their profession.

Also, they want to become part of the mainstream Hollywood system because the current publisher system doesn't allow for any real freedom or innovation for a lot of developers and the only way they can achieve this is if there are third-party private investors (vs. publicly owned shares and stockholders in major publishers)... But there aren't that many and this is why a lot of developers are looking to other places... I.E., Hollywood, for that private financing to start up their own game or computer/visual effects companies.

The other reason they are looking to Hollywood is for professional self-promotion that doesn't exist within the current video game industry to like it does in Hollywood. Hollywood markets its products more on names and associations than the content of the product itself. The games industry, on the other hand, markets games on content vs. who created the content which is why Hollywood looks so attractive to a lot of developers.

There are a lot of dynamics at work here and it just isn't within UBISoft. It is an industry-wide movement if you are a developer and one who is higher-up in the food chain like CliffyB (Epic); John Carmack (ID); and Gabe Newel (Valve); etc, etc. This is why the whole merging of movies and video games is the wave of the future as much as we may not like it.